Deathly Hallows: Initial Reactions

Who was it that used magic late in life?
was that unanswered

Very nice analysis.

Alas, due to time constraints, I do not get to the HP websites often, so these may be dumb questions or comments.

Has anyone done any analysis of Hermione as somewhat representing Hagia Sophia — Holy Wisdom, a term for the Holy Spirit in some Christian traditions? It seems that she often has that role to play: if not Wisdom per se, then common sense often. Did I miss that?

No, not perfectly — but then Harry-as- Christ is far from perfect, either.

I think a main objection to this line of thought may be that such might force a Trinity allegory on Ron/Harry/Hermione. I don’t see that working well.

Second thought. I see that there’s been talk on the postmodern nature of J.K. Rowling’s writing. I’m not competent enough in the field of literary criticism to have a valid opinion on that. What I do see is some evidence —faint but there — of what Martin Luther would call /larva dei/: the masks of God, or often translated “the hidden God”. The basic idea is that God seldom operates directly and explicitly with His power. Instead, He operates through various means: people mainly. To me this appears to be a small factor.

I’m sure others will be much more capable or writing about other themes: Harry and Ron’s baptisms in the pool (with, of course, the analogy to the purifying washing of a candidate for knighthood), etc. There is just so much!

Thanks again for the post and your blog.

The Department of Mysteries also seemed to figure in many people’s speculations.

Nada.

The mysteries were revealed without it.

I was really moved when James, Lily, Sirius, Lupin came to Harry on his walk to the cross. Being surrounded by a cloud of witnesses?

Matthew

Did Hermione’s bag just seem a bit too much like Felix the cat’s magic bag. to me it seemed a bit of a cop out from Rowling. “How do I explain how Hermione had this needful object?…Oh yes, she packed it in the bag before she left the burrow…”

Am I alone on that?

Matthew

How did the Gryffindor sword get back in the sorting hat?

As soon as Harry whispered to the snitch I began sobbing, although to be quite honest, I think they were happy tears for the most part. Rowling has certainly hit us over the head. I’d been expecting just a tiny bit less subtley, but instead she basically ditched it! I was so happy at that. Right from the start we had George joking about feeling “saintlike” and “holey”. I knew it once that began: it wouldn’t stop. And it didn’t!

Anyone notice Harry’s borrowed wands both had wood that ended in “thorn”? I believe the first that Ron fetched for him was “blackthorn” (please correct me if I’m wrong) and then Draco’s was “hawthorn”. Thorn.

I was seeing religious references all over the place, and I agree that Grossman will definitely be kicking himself. There is no way you can deny from where Rowling’s inspiration has come now.

Deathly Hallows is now my favorite work of fiction. I cried countless times, and (weirdly) enjoyed crying. To use a phrase my English teacher always did: it’s cathartic. It’s like a cleansing process.

Oh, and symbolism aside…I knew Snape had to be good as soon as Nigellus mentioned Ginny and her pals had been sentenced to detention with HAGRID by Snape. I don’t think Snape would have overlooked that special bond. He’s way too observant.

I’m just shocked that Voldemort allowed most of the staff to remain, including Hagrid. Favor for a new favorite DE?

PS – I read pretty fast on my first time through so I can’t remember the answer to this question if there is one: What happened to Umbridge after the locket was taken?

Okay Travis. I to thoroughly enjoyed this book. LOVED IT! I don’t have much time as of now BUT with the DoM… I think it was suppose to be left unanswered. THAT was the point. Witches and Wizards were trying to find out the mysteries of death and life, of space, time, etc for centuries. And I think again, (Not sure if this is a Christian message, or more of a theme) but Harry didn’t find those out. If wizards and witches centuries before him couldn’t do it, why would Harry have? He couldn’t. Those things we saw in the DoM are part of God’s wonders, his creation .We only find out what happens in death once me die… and that probably goes for the mysteries of time and space and all the other wonderful things hidden in the department. And again the same could be said for the power of love. It’s such a powerful beautiful force… who would want to figure it out? It’s God’s gift to us humans. That very same gift saved Harry when he was one. That very same gift gave him the courage and strength to die for the wizarding world.

Just my two cents on that subject.

Hey guys who was the person who used magic late in life?!
Ive been skimming through and i cant find a single mention.

Plz help

For me, the biggest unanswered question was internal: What was going on in King’s Cross with the flayed baby? I get much of the potential symbolism here, but what/who *was* it?

I didn’t like the book that much actually.

I can see where Travis is coming from, but It still disturbs me how Dumbledore’s mentality was so blaze towards Harrys life.
There was never a certainty that Harry was as skilled as he was. Harry couldve easily died doing a fools errand that only led to his death.

So glad this post is finally up. I got the book and midnight and read it through in 4 1/2 hours. So I have been positively itching to get here and discuss!

I cried like a baby when Snape told Harry to look at him before he died…so he could see Lily’s eyes as he passed. I cried even harder, though, when Harry came back from death and spoke to LV as clearly as Jesus spoke to Satan. You can’t touch them now. I paid the price. Those who doubted before will not have a leg to stand on.

I knew there would be deaths, but I had no idea that JKR would allow both Tonks and Lupin to die after they had just had a child. And does anyone know who raised him after they died? Harry was the Godfather but they only mention Teddy visiting the Potters in the last chapter.

I am not sure if this is what you were looking for, Travis, but I will “show myself”, as you requested, in hopes that this is the post you are thinking of…here is my post form the “Is Harry a Horcux?” blog…

From post #289…”Harry will realize that his scar is a Horcrux and allow himself to be sacrificed to save the world from LV. Just like Lily sacrificed herself to save Harry. And with that love comes the magical protection it releases…so will Harry have to really die? I don’t think so. I think that the love that spared his life from the start will sustain him when he has to remove the Horcrux from himself to save everyone else.” The funny thing is I made that prediction a year to the day of the book release. Spooky!

I wasn’t right about a lot of things, but I am the most happy that this was right-on, not for my own glory in making a good prediction, but for everyone who hoped that Harry would survive.

Wow,comments are coming in like crazy,I read this post not long ago, and there were only a few comments.

Paul, I agree with you, it didn’t bother me to see good guys using the unforgivable curses. Also, I could be completely wrong, but I think at some point, a good guy used cruciatus.

Christina, 4.5 hours? Wow, that is fast, I finished about an hour and a half ago.

Ben

Travis said…: What Albus knew that Aberforth didn’t was that it’s better to die fighting Voldemort than to live having not opposed him. Death is not the worst thing that can happen to a person, and Harry knew it, too. Aberforth, on the other hand, just wanted to give up, told Harry to run away.

All that may be true, but the charge against Albus, both as a teenager and as an adult, was not that he was a bad person. It was that he was tempted by power, and was far too willing to use others to further “the greater good”.

Harry would have consented, had he known the truth – he really was willing to die to defeat Voldemort. But Albus never bothered to tell him the truth in any of their heart-to-heart chats. Instead that was left as yet one more unpleasant task on Snape’s plate, to be done only at the last possible moment.

I hated it.

I had the feeling that she originally wrote a different ending where Snape’s sacrifice was more noble and Harry died. Perhaps her editors pressured her to re-write it. Then she had to write the epilogue because she had told everyone it would end definitively and there would be no more.

I thought Snape’s death was a throwaway. And it was creepy when he asked to look in Harry’s eyes when he was dying (presumably because they were “just like Lily” – eeww). The only part that was emotional for me was when Harry was walking to his “death” and his parents were by his side. I think this is the chapter she said she wrote at the beginning. (Definitely NOT the epilogue!)

I assumed Mad Eye would be alive, or at least his body be found. No resolution (other than the eye). I assumed that if she’s going to kill major characters like Lupin and Tonks that she’d at least give them a scene to die in. Nope. I assumed Harry would have to face the Weasleys again after the death of their son. Nope again. She dodged all the emotional bullets.

Plus, why did Snape even go to Voldemort? If he really was a good guy and so smart and things were coming to a head, why just go meeky to the slaughter? Geez…Hermione had more tricks up her sleeve than Snape did.

Ron and Hermione disappear for two critical chapters, reappear with the basilisk teeth…and then they’re never used (except on the cup, and we don’t see that)? What was that about? And the tiara (oops, sorry, diadem – forgot this isn’t Disney) gets destroyed by Crabbe, the worst magician of his class? Pretty weak magic for a Horcrux!!!

Neville…the confusion over the Chosen One of the prophecy…why set that all up and not pay it off? So Neville cuts the head off the snake. Big deal. That’s why he’s in the prophecy for seven books? What about HIS need for revenge and Bellatrix? While it might have been cute to have Molly take the last swipe, it was Neville’s place to do it.

And yes, I AM p**ed that Harry gets to rip off goblins and throw Unforgivable Curses and just walk away. But then, I guess everyone walks away at the end in this book, even the Malfoys. No real Nuremberg in this one.

Harry and Ginny just smile and look on as the next cycle of Malfoy bullying comes into being in the epilogue. How wonderful.

Come on, Travis. Tell me why this is all wrong as you always do. Bottom line to me is…if you’re going to use Christ mythology, then you gotta put someone on the cross. Otherwise, Voldemort’s taunt about everyone else sacrificing for Harry is true. Willingness to perform an act of sacrifice is NOT the same as sacrifice. You just can’t be Aslan and Luke Skywalker all in the same chapter.

I LOVE YOU LIZ!!!!!

you said everything that crossed my mind!

The whole novel just seemed like a fanfic or smt

I definitely thought that it lived up to the hype. It has happened so often to me that I have started a book or series that has a great premise and keeps me turning the pages but then falls flat at the end. I personally think that the willingness to die means as much, at least as long as you believe that you really are going to die, which Harry did. The “resurrection” worked for me because of the fact that Harry had to finish the job, as it were.

I was bothered by the use of the Cruciatus curse but not so much the Imperius curse, mainly because I really couldn’t see any other way for them to do what they needed to do. Of course, “for the greater good” is obviously not something that JKR approves of in the normal course of things.

Hey, Travis – I’m in Buffalo and I groaned out loud when you said on one of your earlier podcasts that you’d gotten HBP in Wegmans, because I was really worried that you’d given away my secret for making getting the books short and sweet. Luckily, however, the one I went to was about the only one in the area NOT having special events (probably because there’s a Barnes & Noble right down the street), so I was home by 12:30. Of course, you may not have that many listeners in this area yet, although I have told people that I think you have one of the best podcasts out there.

P.S. You’re right – you do NOT have an accent. My sister went to college in NYC and they said that had a “network” accent, which basically means none.

Can anyone help me out in understanding the cover art (US edition). I just finished the book – head still spinning – but I cannot for the life of me figure out where they are!?

To those who felt queasy because of Nagini and Bathilda: think how glad John Granger will feel that his prediction of a decapitation came true. For myself, I could have lived without it. But she’s the author. If she wanted a decap, a decap she got.

On a different note, I would like to be the first to say that I think JKR has out-allegoried C.S. Lewis. Harry’s walk in the forest, accompanied by James, Lily, Sirius and Lupin was incredibly moving (one of two places I cried). For me, it left Aslan’s walk in the woods with Susan and Lucy in the shade. It had none of the heavy-handedness because it felt completely natural that the people he had loved best would walk him to his death. It also perfectly resolved the dilemma (along with the King’s Cross chapter) about how close Harry would get to the dead without actually dying. He did not cross the veil – the ones on the other side came to him.

I loved – totally loved – the King’s Cross chapter. I had publicly doubted that JKR would be able to pull of a beyond the veil scenario. And she did it perfectly. So perfectly that I could see it – and hear it – as I read. And yes she does believe in hell, and yes, she does believe that some people are beyond redemption. I had hoped that Voldemort might be redeemed after death. But obviously, she’s made of sterner stuff.

Snape didn’t get a chance to say and do much, but he had done it all before, hadn’t he? And so much was exactly as we’d thought – the love for Lily, the breach due to his affiliation with the DEs, the bargaining with Voldemort for her life, and his resolve to keep Harry safe because of his love for his mother. That one word “Always” spoke volumes. However, even here JKR surprised us: aside from one commenter who wondered if Snape and Lily were in some way related, I don’t think any of us guessed that he had loved her for almost all of his life.

I was profoundly relieved at the deaths, because I had truly expected Ron or Hermione to take a bullet for Harry or the cause. Dobby’s death made me cry – not so much his death, actually, as Harry’s reaction to it. But it was absolutely a necessary death, to give Harry a wake-up call: better to stop people from dying than find a stone that’ll bring back the dead. Also, of course, Kreacher had stepped very neatly into the role of cute CGI side-kick. Fred was doomed from the moment George lost his ear – we knew that there were way too many Weasleys for 100% survival rate, and one member of a pair of twins is almost an invitation to a cull. Tonks has never emerged as a real person for me, so no loss there. And Lupin – well I would have missed Lupin had he died at the end of PoA. But his role since has been very minimal.

I did catch one mistake. When Alastor Moody’s curse challenges Lupin when he enters 12 Grimauld Place, Lupin responds: “I did not kill you Albus”.

And to all those of you who predicted that Harry was an accidental Horcrux: well done.

I really, really enjoyed the book and was amazed at the very obvious Christian themes and quotes. Dumbledore’s plan did not bother me. It is kind of like he knew the “magic deeper still” of the deathly hallows and knew that they would protect Harry. Would it have benefited Harry to know he was the Horcrux sooner? I think not. He might have ended his life too early and in the wrong way without destroying the other horcruxes first with the “power the Dark Lord knows not.”

Is it possible that a)JKR dropped some bogus hints in her interviews to throw people off the trail? or b)some things ended up on the cutting room floor? I join the other commenter who could NOT find where someone did magic late in life. And the shape of Harry’s scar being significant…well, was it?

Here are some things I found particularly satisfying:
1)Dudley’s turnabout
2)Kreacher’s redemption
3)not an exact quote, but roughly…on why DD gave the Deluminator to Ron
Ron: “He knew I’d run out on you.”
Harry: “No, he knew you’d want to come back.”
(that part made me cry!)
4)Luna’s all-around usefulness and resourcefulness
5)Neville turning out to be magnificent in the Battle of Hogwarts
6)Regulus turning out to have been a good guy
7)Snape not having been unmitigatedly horrible all his life
8)ditto for Petunia
9)Draco turning out less horrible than he was looking
10)the redemption of Percy (I actually woke up my husband by cheering when Percy came crashing in at the last minute!)
11)the unification of all houses in the battle
12)getting to read the word “snogging” one more time in literature

I did have one more question, besides the late-in-life deal. When Harry said that the true master of the Elder Wand would’ve been Draco, because he had taken DD’s wand from him against his will….when did that happen? I’m not remembering it from HBP.

Great job, Travis! Keep it coming!

Laura

For those who don’t like the book. Jo did say that many wouldn’t. A word of note, the plot of the entire books works very well. It was the things she promised us largely in interviews that were not followed through. They had no real set up in the story itself.

I am actually far more surprised more did didn’t like it. The response is almost overwhelmingly positive (with some criticism as a side dish, but not everything is perfect.) I actually expected this one to be the most loved/hated book of the series. It’s far from that… Each person has their opinion of the books… but wow, I’m astounded at how many people really loved this one.

I was wondering how closely the Deathly Hallows are supposed to be associated with the three temptations of Christ. That some connection exists seems clear enough to me. They would seem to promise a way for Harry to achieve his mission without the ‘cross’. However, could it be closer than that.

Following the account in Matthew 4, the Resurrection Stone corresponds with the first temptation (stones into bread). The temptation is that of restoring life in the wrong and unnatural manner (‘man shall not live by bread alone…’). Being driven purely by a hunger for holding onto life (both your own and those close to you) is wrong. Admittedly, this one is a bit of stretch. Perhaps someone has a better idea on this one.

The second temptation (Christ casting himself down from the temple, confident in his Father’s protection) is far more clearly related to the Invisibility Cloak. The Invisibility Cloak is the ‘father’s protection’. Just as Christ is tempted to presume on the protection of his father and avoid the suffering of the cross, so Harry could rely on the Cloak of his father’s and avoid his fate, even when his ‘hour’ has come (quite literally).

Jesus walked, as it were, invisible though many crowds seeking to kill him (Luke 4:30; John 7:30; 8:59; 10:39) and could have done so again. However, both Christ and Harry have to step out from under the protection of their fathers’ cloak and face evil alone.

The resurrection stone might also relate in some way to this temptation. The spirits of Harry’s friends and relations help him as he approaches death, playing a role similar to that of the angel in the Garden of Gethsemane prior to Christ’s death (Luke 22:43). Jesus could have had spirits to minister to him throughout his sufferings and could have appealed to a legion of angels to fight his battle with him (Matthew 26:53). However, he must fight the final battle alone. Harry is in a similar position, being ministered to by the spirits of friends and family as he approaches death, something that he has to be prepared to lose as he faces his enemy alone.

The Elder Wand corresponds to the final temptation (rule over the kingdoms of the world on condition of worshipping Satan). The Elder Wand gives the greatest power in the world to its owner, being the means by which the owner can rule over all others. Jesus is tempted to grasp at rule in the wrong way. However, he must undergo the self-sacrifice of the cross. Only then will Satan be disarmed and the rule be given to him as its rightful possessor. Much the same thing happens with Harry. He must resist chasing the wand before it is given to him as its rightful possessor following his self-sacrifice.

Harry, like Christ, is given three temptations to pursue a ‘crossless’ victory. However, as he takes the way of the ‘cross’ he becomes the rightful owner of all. The last enemy of Death is defeated, but not by means of the tools that Death himself offers.

Thoughts?

To add another angle to this fantastic avalanche of thoughts and comments:

I am intrigued by the Bible references Travis noted. Matthew 6:21, “Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.” Take a look at the surrounding Bible verses to see how fascinating it is in the light of Deathly Hallows. Serving two lords, the famous Our Father-prayer… And what about these verses directly after the quoted verse:
22″The eye is the lamp of the body. If your eyes are good, your whole body will be full of light. 23 But if your eyes are bad, your whole body will be full of darkness. If then the light within you is darkness, how great is that darkness!”

Have you noticed how the eyes keep returning in DH (and perhaps the other books too, I must check) whenever somebody dies? Mad-Eye’s magical eye pops up at Umbridge’s office and is burried afterwards by Harry. When Dobby dies, his eyes are described as empty orbs reflecting the starlight. Fred’s “eyes stared without seeing” when he died. And finally, when Snape dies there is one final moment of eye-contact between him and Harry before the light in his dark eyes fade away. (I guess that’s why it’s so important that Harry had his mother’s eye. Snape died staring in Lily’s eyes.)

Did anyone notice that the questions that have all been left out are the ones that Jo has mentioned in her interviews? If we were to SOLEY read the books, and accept cannon for the way things were, then there would be few unanswered questions (other than what happened to everyone else, which I think Jo is leaving up to all of us.)

Weird how she did that… and she never said she’d lie… I’m guessing she has all of these answers… maybe they were edited out?

AND WOW! This just in from Mugglenet…

“In its first 24 hours on sale, Scholastic has announced that Deathly Hallows has sold 8.3 million copies in the United States. Half-Blood Prince had sold 6.9 million copies in its first day on sale back on July 16th, 2005.”

Awesome!

And just as an update, it seems DH is getting VERY favorable with the general critics and fans alike.

http://www.metacritic.com/books/authors/rowlingjk/harrypotterandthedeathlyhallows

And on Amazon the book has 4.5 starts (out of 5.)

I can understand some won’t like the book. But that’s fine. I’ve noticed most people have issues with either the death and the epilogue but love/liked the overall plot. I don’t know why I need to keep reassuring myself of this. It’s a fantastic book. I do want to know more, but from the BOOKS have told us, Jo has answered most of her questions. It’s juts hide time she answers the ones she brought up in her previous interviews.

Some things the book DID bring up that I want clarifying… Why did RAB go and hunt the Horcruxes? I’m going with that it was the death of his father. Great pick up by Jodel there. Why did Harry so casually use the Cruciatus curse? I can understand the use of Imperio but not that one… though it could have been because he was on the tower that night and knew just how evil that DE really was.

Travis I loved the handling of the Snape plot. I know he wasn’t featured much in the book but as this is Harry’s journey, then that is acceptable. One thing that I did love… Snape being so good means that he has helped Harry as we saw in the Pensive, in more ways than Harry knew. So his presence in the other book really is now amplified. His death was so sudden. But I think people need to read this book, slower, once more and let everything sink in. More things come into fruition, etc.

Liked it enough to read until dawn Saturday to finish it. Two particular thoughts – first, I think the basis for Dumbledore’s trust of Snape is found particularly in the resonance between Dumbledore and Snape’s lives – having experienced first hand the agony of allowing a dark wizard to destroy someone he loved Dumbledore is able to understand and validate that Snape’s grief and conversion is genuine. Also, I think Dumbledore is clearly setting Snape a penance in charging him with protecting Harry, and understands that the unresolved conflict with James will only drive the obligation deeper. In that context, I found Dumbledore’s aknowledgement of Snape’s courage (I sometimes feel we sort too early) is his absolution. There is also the wonderful contrast between the skeptical and demanding Dumbledore, who comes to trust Snape only after Snape truely proves his loyalty, and the “trusting” Voldemort, who as soon as Snape presents a tale that conforms with Voldemort’s own prejudices, accepts Snape’s story completely.

The other, more thematic thing, is the multitude of ways that Voldemort’s ignorance of love sets up his fall. Lily, Snape, Neville, Regulus (betraying Voldemort out of love for his house elf!?), Kreacher, even the Malfoys are all driven to make contributions to his defeat by their connections to others, connections that Voldemort may cruelly or cynically manipulate, but without any understanding of what it will drive them to do.

I agree Mrs. Weasley. The Deathly Hallows plot was awesome. NO ONE could have guessed that. What I also liked was how she used that to really show the choices harry had to make. It wasn’t just a plot device, but a character device. Bravo Jo!

Wow, that took a long time to read through all the comments, but well worth it.

I loved the book. When I finished after more than 24 hours of nearly non-stop reading, I was exhausted but very satisfied, and emotionally drained. I had laughed, cried (alot) and been amazed–especially at Kreacher.

I loved seeing the obvious Christian imagery and references and direct quotes, all the alchemical imagery throughout, the King Arthur references, and little nods to other books that Rowling has said she read: the Silver Doe reminded me of “The Little White Horse”, Luna’s house made me think of “I Capture the Castle”, and of course, the baptism when Harry saw the sword in the pond was a combination of Arthurian legend and of Eustace going into the deep well in “Voyage of the Dawn Treader”. Even Harry’s reaction was similar.

I’ve put some of my thoughts on my blog, mostly relating to “The Prince’s Tale”, which was so well done. I think it will likely be my favorite chapter–or one of them. Finding out that Snape and Dumbledore did not make an Unbreakable Vow, but let their “Yes” be “Yes” and “No”, “No”, was just one more of the many Christian moments in the book–and perfectly explained why Dumbledore never further answered the question of why he so completely trusted Severus Snape. To tell Harry or anyone else more would have meant that Dumbledore hadn’t kept his promise to Snape to never tell.

Like some of you, I am still bothered that Harry used Cruciatus curse–the Imperius one I can understand, but torture? Mmmm, not so sure I’ll ever be comfortable with that one.

And Al, thanks for making that connection to the three temptations of Christ. I might have got there eventually, but I will definitely understand the Deathly Hallows in a richer way than I had so far.

And of course, it had to be old Bathilda who tipped off Dumbledore to what had happened to the Potters–why didn’t I think of that? Good catch, Matthew.

I was so pleased that many of the things that I had thought would happen, did, though they happened in a completely different way. On my blog I started with Snape as his loyalty to Dumbledore and determination to protect Harry was the one that seemed to be in jeopardy.

I thought when I was reading that the tiara from Auntie Muriel might be the Horcrux, but was pleased that it was the one in the Room of Requirement, which was the first one I noticed. And I’m OK with Harry being an accidental Horcrux. Especially the way Rowling wrote it, that even that torn portion of Voldemort’s soul wanted to cling to something living.

Predestination–I do think that she was going down that path with some of the coincidences. It’s my understanding that she is a member of the Church of Scotland, no? Which I am told is very similar to the Presbyterian church, of which I am a member, and yes, predestination is a biggy. My Methodist minister friend and I had that conversation over a year ago. He pointed out that the acceptance of predestination is one of the main differences between the Presbyterians and the Methodists. I’ve not really studied theology, so I’ll take his word for it.

However, a belief in predestination does not negate one’s ability to choose. It’s just that you will arrive where you are supposed to arrive eventually, but your choices may help you get there in an easier manner or they may make your journey longer and more difficult, or in the case of Tom Riddle, his complete rejection of what his destiny was not fulfilled because of his choices and complete rejection of the good and of love–things he never understood and always rejected.

You can all jump all over that one, and I can’t really argue the point, but that is my very limited understanding of predestination, and that view, IMO, seems to work well with Deathly Hallows and what Rowling does with the story.

Just as an aside, our Associate Pastor has been doing a sermon series on the Sermon on the Mount, and every week I’ve been thinking of how much it relates to things in the first six books. Now with the seventh one out, it’s incredible that anyone would say that Rowling’s books are not Christian. Maybe that’s what’s bothering some people. I’m sure it will be a problem for some of the people at one small forum I sometimes go where they didn’t like OotP because it was love that was to defeat evil, and they are avowed atheists. (I might stay away from there for quite a while, actually–there will definitely be some unhappy souls there.)

Anyway, today’s sermon was from Matthew 5:38-48, about revenge and how we respond to our enemies. Pastor Neil hasn’t read HP, but his wife does, and he goes to see the movies. But his timing couldn’t be better.

Pat (who really needs some sleep)

Kambria, that “Dudley” in the MoM was a last name, not a first one, I believe. Harry gave his name as “Vernon Dudley.”

But while we’re on the subject of the Dursleys, and since this is a post on initial reactions, I had some regarding the Dursleys. Where were they taken? What happened to them? It would have been nice to know, in the end, since Dudley and Petunia were Harry’s only living relatives.

And, I still wonder at Dudley’s reaction to the dementors, and vice versa, since Muggles aren’t supposed to see them (or feel their effects, except for despair), and I don’t believe dementors would suck out the soul of Muggles.

And one last, unrelated comment – I sure hope that one of the Weasley kids named one of their children after Fred, since neither Ginny nor Ron did.

Perhaps Harry using the unforgivable curses (which, as was pointed out earlier are “legally” unforgivable by the ministry) also serves to remind us who the ultimate decider of what’s unforgivable actually is.

I know as a Christian it is sometimes hard to come to grips with the idea that we are really & completely forgiven.

One of the most poignant scenes for me in the book was the chapter about the Dursleys leaving…that was the first place I cried. Dudley reached a level where he able to think independently….how wonderful!

That definitly took a long time to read all of those comments, but I am so glad I did becasue these are exactly the things that have been running through my mind since I finished reading.

Where to begin:

First, how amazing was the plot of the three brothers and the deathly hallows. I dont think any one even came close to thinking about that story line, though we did know that the cloak was much more important then initally thought. I agree that it can be a reference to the three temptations of christ, but I see it more as a reference to the fables and greek mythology we grow up with as children. I know at least in my own experince that in almost every story I heard or read, though Im blanking on specifics, that the one who is unafraid to die will always hold the most power. But however you disect it I truly enjoyed learning that new history of the magical world. Though in this I wonder, we know Harry was a decendent of the Peverells, but does that mean he was the heir of gryffindor too? I know this was purly speculation on the fans part on whether there would be one or not, but I was hoping Jo might make that more meaningful.

Second, I can understand how all of you feel about Harry using the cruciatus curse, but we have seen it before when Harry used it again Bellatrix in the Ministry of Magic at the end of Order of the Pheonix. A constant them through out the books that I found was that Harry had to learn to control his emotions, especially in times of heightened stress and importance, as shown in his conversation with Neville before taking his “walk to the cross” explaining about Nagini. The point was that in all his rage and all his emotion, he never did truly cross the line into evil, his heart always remained pure, though stricken with grief.

Third, I definitly agree that alot of the plot holes that were found seem to stem mainly from Jo herself, and not so much the books. Though I think we will find that if Jo need give an answer to who used magic late in life I think we will find it was Filch in the Battle of Hogwarts. Although I must say that I thought there would be some importance to Fawkes, though there was little to no metion of him.

Fourth, I agree that I still cant figure out what the front cover of the book is reference too. My first initial thought was Hogwarts as well, in the final due between Harry and Voldemort. But if you read the book carefully, it says when Harry disarmed Voldemort that he was still holding Draco’s wand, and that then when he caught Voldemorts that he had 2, so it cant be that scene because he doesnt have anything in his hand. My second thought was in the forbidden forest where Harry sacrificed himself, but again Voldemort is not holding the Elder Wand, so it cant be that either. As far as I know the only other time Voldemort and Harry were face to face was in the begining of the book when Harry was escaping with Hagrid to the Tonks house. (By the way, how much did everyone expect Hagrid to be dead there?? I was so ready for the blow I was almost angry when he was alive!)

Finally, though Im sure there will be plenty more to come, I must say that I truly loved this book. There were some points that bothered me, such as the coincidental happenstances that so convieniently occured, but overall they did not distract from the story at all. I know I personally was starting to feel just as fustrated as the trio when they were sitting in the woods, with locket, with no idea how to destroy it or what to do next, Jo definitly made me feel there annoyance, though I dont think that is the right word to describe it. Oh, and when Ron and Hermione finally started going at it before searching for the diadam, i dont know about you guys but I screamed FINALLY!! to myself, which unfortunatly woke up my entire house at 4 in the morning. In the end though I am extremely happy that she let Harry have his happy ending. In book six I was so heart broken when he told Ginny that he couldnt be with her that I was praying that Jo would allow them to be together in the end, whether dead or alive, though alive was prefereable. After losing so many people that he cared about and after 7 years of fighting someone that made his life completely miserable it was amazing, and most definitly made me cry, to see him 19 years later married to the girl he loved, and who loved him since age 10!! and with 3 children. And I forget who said it about but seeing the childrens names just made the scene even more emotional, espeically Albus Severus. And the speech Harry gave his son about how being sorted into Slytherin would be an honor becasue Severus was one of the bravest people he knew just made me loose it. Travis, I think I joined you in the weenie department this book. It was a wonderful book, and a perfect ending to a perfect series.

Loved the book but like others, was a bit disappointed at some of the unanswered questions/plot points. With all the build up over Harry’s/Lily’s eyes, just having Snape look into them as he died didn’t seem to me to be a great resolution to that “crucial” question. I also wished we learned more about the James and Lily backstory and how they thrice defeated Voldemort. Trevor the Toad was a complete red herring. And if Harry is a descendent of the Peveralls, wouldn’t that make him related to Voldemort through the Gaunts?

I have read the above comments with increasing dismay, anger and disappointment.

So she didn’t tie off all the threads. Were there any important ones she forgot about? So she didn’t include everyone’s backstory. Would it have made any difference to the outcome? So Harry used some nasty curses. Did you think that your view of Harry’s morality was binding to the author? So she didn’t say enough about your favorite characters. It’s her story. So the two new(ish) plot threads she introduced into the story were neither central nor completely realized. Did they take away from the central message of the story?

JKR does rely too much on coincidence. That’s not new, is it? You’ve read six of her books. You know what kind of writer she is. And in spinning seven volumes, some of the details have gotten mixed up. Sort them out.

Look at the book you have in your hands. Did it speak to you? What did it say? Did it move you? Are you sorry that the tale is told and there is no more?

I know this post is called “Initial Reactions” and if your initial reaction is to pick holes, then that is your right. But I for one (the only one?) would like a post where people could talk more about what was done well and less about how the book did not meet their expectations.

And S_B, your comment gives me no satisfaction whatsoever.

I dunno the whole book was a bit of a dissapointment. It didnt seem like ROwling.

I think she herself had built up way too many secrets and special connections over the years, that she finally figured out that she wasn’t able to close them all in one book and gave it up as a bad job(because i thought the beggining was quite good.)

In short I think she created something bigger than herslf when she gave birth to Harry Potter.

Reyhan, I don’t want to give the impression that I disliked the book. For me, it maybe scored about a 2.5 out of 5. The disappointment with the problems slightly outweighed the joy at the successes.

But there definitely were some successess. Some of them, in book were:

- Kreacher’s transformation, and the way in which Herminone got Harry and Ron to acknowledge the injustice of the slavery problem.

- Dobby’s death. What a noble character, and what a beautiful end for him.

- The ministry. I am so glad to see that Jo did not just make up the horrific and corrupt MoM of Books 1-6 as some kind of joke. She knew exactly what a monstrous thing it was, and how easy it would be for Voldemort to take it over entirely.

- “Deconstructing Dumbledore” and the conversation with Aberforth. That plot line was beautifully handled.

- Harry’s walk to the cross.

So yes, a lot of beautiful moments that I am glad to have read. But also a fair amount of problems in how this volume connects to the 6 that came before it. And some real disappointment on my part in how some characters/plotlines were handled.

Does anyone know if Rowling had family members killed in the war? I thought that Nazi imagery (pure bloods and mudbloods, the rounding up of half-bloods, kangaroo courts, families fleeing the country) was some of the most visceral and descrpitive writing of the series.

Quick response, more later:

I think Pax is correct: I think she decided on the Encyclopedia when she realized how many small details she’d never be able to provide answers to. I’m looking forward to that volume, should she choose to do it!

Id still like to hear some thoughts on what the picture on the front of the book is referencing. My post # 78 explains my confusion

I have to freely admit exasperation with some of the negative response. I predicted long ago that our own expectations for this book – and our own theories – would get in the way of our enjoyment. Those who were able to hold loosely to their theories enjoyed the book well. Many of the complaints about what Rowling should have told us come from where we think the story should have gone.

I think it is fair to say that many of the missing details and “contradictions” come from Rowling interviews, not from canon itself. And this is to be expected. After all, the book was outlined, but not finished. It was inevitable that she was going to adjust some plot points over the course of writing the book. So, Grindewald was “dead” in a 2005 interview. He was not dead in canon, and in the process of writing Book 7, she needed him for the plot. So in reality, Grindelwald was never dead, and I’m glad he wasn’t; it was a great part of the plot!

I said it before, and I’ll say it again: we got way too caught up in the small details.

I think answers can be provided for many of the frustrated questions here, but I don’t have time for them now. I do think the plot has its weak points, and there are some rather contrived moments.

But the whole point of the book is the climax and denouement, and it doesn’t get much better than that. Lewis has been skewered for his plot holes. Rowling will be, too. But if you walk away from Narnia not thrilled and exhilerated by Aslan, you’ve missed the point. Same with Rowling! People will ask questions about plot details for years to come, but what Harry did on behalf of the Wizarding World and the victory of sacrificial love over death is just tremendous storytelling.

Morgana,

I agree to a certain level, I felt it fit with the story in that the characters were older now, and as in real life as people get older their vocabulary expands. This was clearly shown by Molly weasley screaming bitch at Bellatrix after she attacked Ginny.

Everyone,

After continuing to read all these posts through out the day a finality has occured to me that has not yet been mentioned, at least not to my memory.

From the beginning of the Harry Potter series we have known the one true desire of Harry’s heart, a family. And through out the series we have seen how everything close to resembling a family is stripped away from him. In the first book his parents, then Sirius in the 3rd, then Dumbledore in the sixth….his entire life his long lost hope for a family has been dangled in front of him and then ripped away by two simple words, Avada Kedavra.

This is probably why I enjoyed the end of Deathly Hallows so much. Because after his defeat of Voldemort, and the finality of his life long battle, we see the boy who lived 19 years later with that which his heart desired most, a family. He has his wife and his 3 children, each of which carry the memory of those who meant everything to him in the past, his parents and his beloved headmasters. I would not be suprised if James and Lily’s middle names or Ron and Hermiones childrens middle names referenced sirius, fred, and lupin, but it made me happy that in the end we could see Harry with what he has wanted ever since it was ripped away from him so cruely at Godric’s Hollow.

I have a comment and a question.
On the issue of someone doing magic later in life, I don’t know that I really understand what this is all about. (I don’t spend a lot of time reading all JKR’s interviews). Perhaps it is referring to Molly Weasley. Sure she does magic all the time, but just stuff like cooking and cleaning. She has always played a purely supportive, mothering role for everyone else. Now she finally gets to actually go into battle and do combat magic, which you have never seen her do before. I could be way off on this, but it’s my first impression.
Now the question. When Harry is in King’s Cross, he sees this horrible wailing creature and is told there is absolutely nothing he can do for it. Now, from everything else in that chapter, it seems like this is supposed to be sort of a Purgatory. I don’t know a lot about Purgatory, so I may be getting this wrong. If the wailing creature is supposed to be Voldemort, why would he be in Purgatory? It seems like if there is anyone that would go directly to hell, it would be him. Instead it is almost as if he is just going to be stuck in limbo forever. Is this creature just the remnant of the Harry/horcrux? Perhaps just a vision for Harry of what Voldemort’s soul is like? I dunno.

Trish, thanks for clarifying that one about Kreacher. I never thought that I would like Kreacher, but he was marvelous, and especially that it was he who led the house elves at the battle.

I agree with Reyhan and Travis. I think some are too tied to their own theories of where they thought the story was going. I found the same thing at another forum, where there are many who are “not religious” or are avowed atheists. Surprisingly, they liked the book, and then started nitpicking. So I probably won’t go back there for discussions, even though I’ve been chatting with some of them since 2001. It’s not an argument I care to be in.

Back to the Peverell ring and whether that makes Harry related to Voldemort. I don’t think it does. Gaunt in HBP is proud of the locket which was Slytherin’s and that is his ancestory. But all he says about the ring is that it has been in his family for a long time–that doesn’t mean that he came by it through inheritance. Given what the Gaunts became and what we saw of them, it’s possible that it was stolen from the rightful owners, and that the Gaunts had no idea just what it’s value and importance were?

So, Harry is a descendent of the Peverell line, and rightful heir to the cloak, and possbily to the wand and the Resurrection stone, if there are no other heirs.

Here’s what Marvolo says to Ogden about the ring, HBP, US version, p. 207:

For a moment, Harry thought Gaunt was making an obscene hand gesture, but then realized that he was showing Ogden the ugly, black-stoned ring he was wearing on his middle finger, waving it before Ogden’s eyes.

“See this? See this? Know what it is? Know where it came from? Centuries it’s been in our family, that’s how far back we go, and pure-blood all the way! Know how much I’ve been offered for this, with the Peverell coat of arms engraved on the stone?”

Then he drags Merope over by the locket, and says, HBP, US p. 208:

“Slytherin’s!” yelled Gaunt. “Salazar Slytherin’s! We’re his last living descendants, what do you say to that, eh?”

He never says that his family descended from the Peverell family–just that the ring was from the Peverell family and had been in his family for a long time. He’s so clear about establishing his connection as a rightful heir to Slytherin, that it seems if he were an heir of the Peverell line as well, he would have said so, but he doesn’t. His anscestors were once rich, so they might have purchased it. I tend to think that it’s the sort of thing that might have been stolen, though, given what the Guants were like. Marvolo may not even be aware of how his family came to own it.

I think that particular point is a great example of Jo leading us to make an assumption that misdirects our understanding of what the facts actually are. Brilliant.

And the cover art–I think it has to be in the Great Hall. The windows and walls of the castle were damaged throughout, and the ceiling reflects the outside sky, which at that point was the beginning of dawn. There’s also an explosion when the spells meet. So Harry being wandless does appear to be a choice of the artist rather than something in the story. Odd that she would leave that out, but she’s also had Harry’s wand in the wrong hand several times. I still love the cover, don’t get me wrong, but I’m not going to worry about that particular detail.

Pat

I totally adored this book. I found alot of touching moments throughtout it’s entirety.

I really wish Jo would continue the series, but I guess all good things must come to an end. =[

I haven’t quite been able to read all the comments, but just chiming in briefly: I found the book dissatisfying. And yes, as you know, I am a Snape fan and defender, so I am sad about his death – but it isn’t just that. I think any alert reader would have understood Severus’s chances of coming out alive were less than 50/50. Something to throw by you – yes, at least it is conclusively proven that Snape is Dumbledore’s man through and through – but I knew that by the end of OOTP. Some Snape fans truly hate his motivation; I”m one of them, though I don’t feel as strongly about it as some. He defied Voldemort, at the risk of his life, for nearly 20 years because he was carrying a torch for a dead woman who was married to someone else – someone he hated, and who hated him? I can understand why fans find this disturbing. Where is the principle here? As Pat has said, this is a young man who *keeps his promises*, at all costs, and who is remarkably brave and faithful in doing what he sees as his duty – and yet he has no moral principles except love for a dead woman who apparently never loved him? This is supposed to be enough? That does bother me a little. And it bothers me a lot that, contrary to what Rowling has said in interviews, it seems Snape was never loved.

Then, as CMWinters of livejournal points out, they just leave his body in the Shrieking Shack to rot. That’s just awful. And you cannot tell me they don’t; that they finally give the poor fellow the respect and honor he deserves, because there is *nothing* in the text to indicate it. Why not? Again, as my livejournaller friend said, what would it have taken to say in a sentence or two that Snape’s body was brought into the hall to rest with the other heros of the battle?

I am also bothered by the ‘good’ side’s casual use of Unforgivable Curses. These are called Unforgivable for a good reason. ALL of them, not just the AK, damage the soul of the caster because, in order to use them, you have to (1) succumb to hate, and (2) dehumanize your victim. ALL of them. Professor Granger makes a convincing case that, far from being the most benign of the curses, “Imperio” is actually the worst, because it denies any possibily of free will on the part of its victim and thus dehumanizes them entirely.

Then, I thought it was a bit shoddy that Harry got to die and come back to life. I thought the whole point about his mother’s eyes was that he was capable of self-sacrificial love, and that it would be required of him. It wasn’t – not really. The boy’s courage and determination to sacrifice himself for his *friends* was sincere – no problems there – but, if death is not to be feared; if the whole message of these books is that a loving acceptance of death brings triumph and life from it, why couldn’t Harry really die? I also very much missed any real reconciliation with Severus, and I really, really wanted to see Harry – who’s been an angry, vindictive kid – show love for *enemies*. There was just a glimpse of that, with Kreacher, but how much more powerful could it have been with Snape?

But I mostly hated the good guys tossing the Unforgivables around, the heavy-handed analogies to Nazism, (though Umbridge was appropriately chilling, as always – but what happened to her? Does anyone know?), the sentimental coda that told me hardly anything I actually wanted to know, and the mechanical, paint-by-numbers feel of the plot. There were several things I loved.

I was basically vindicated about Snape. I was *right* that he was a loving person, that he was Dumbledore’s man, and that he was a hero. I loved the Regulus/Kreacher story (and perhaps that in itself is indication enough that Sirius and the Marauders are not always right.) I loved Dumbledore’s backstory; I really, really loved seeing that he himself had dabbled with serious darkness and made very grave mistakes as a young man – and that it was in an attempt to conquer death. And Harry was a horcrux! Yes! I loved Harry shouting at Lupin about hs cowardice, *and* that it made Lupin straighen up and fly right. And there were other things I anticipated – I wrote out Snape curing Dumbledore in his office, and telling him about the Unbreakable Vow, in a story on my livejournal more than a year ago. Stoppered death is for real, and Dumbledore really did order Snape to kill him. I’d either guessed or agreed with both those things way back in October, 2005.

I was happy Neville and Luna got to shine. That’s about it. so I’d say I’d give the book a C, but I am grieving for poor Snape, who got so little respect even in death. There’s no excuse for that shoddiness, really. Sorry for the length!

I don’t think anyone actually believes that Snape’s body was left to rot in the Shrieking Shack forever. It’s just that Harry didn’t dig a grave for him with his own hands, like he did for Dobby; he was not grieved over, like Fred, or Tonks or Lupin. He was forgotten in the battle and the subsequent celebration. No one shed a tear for him because no one loved him.

I don’t think JKR is going to hear the end of this one.

http://hogwartsprofessor.com/

Ok people check out this link that i found, it states exactly what we were waiting for but in some parts, didn’t get.

(this site was Pre-release)

Travis, I believe (and I could easily be wrong) that when JKR predicted that some people were going to “loathe” the book, she probably meant the Christian allusions: the sacrifice, King’s Cross (how opportune is that name!), the resurrection and the subsequent triumph over evil.

She was wrong about that. The walk in the wood, the conversation with the dead, the vision of Tom Riddle’s hell, and (to a lesser extent) the final battle, are classic. They’re the best things she’s ever done, and people will recognize that, regardless of their religious affiliation – or lack thereof.

I also believe that she has always underestimated the fascination Snape exerts over her readers, to the extent of exasperation. It’s a wonderful case of a creation developing a life almost independent of the author. I ask myself: how can you get angry over the fact that you didn’t get to attend a fictional character’s funeral? It reminds me of the police officer who drew his gun and started firing when the bad guys on the television show he was watching had cornered the detective hero.

Oh and Travis I dont mind you using my questions to start deconstructing.

Maybe unresolved plot points was a faulty title

Wow travis u commented on the site too. I never noticed.

Reyhan, very well said. I noted in a podcast a while ago that Rowling seemed quite taken aback that people liked Snape so much. Orson Scott Card’s analysis of Snape was almost bang on – he’s a character who went from being a necessary plot point to taking on a life of his own, even within the text. This is why it feels like, to many, his very limited role in DH is a disappointment. I still don’t think it is, necessarily; after all, HBP was his book.

One does wonder whether Rowling was even unaware of the role Snape had taken on in the series. In some ways, he was sort of handled as a plot-turner, nothing more in Book 7. I need to do a re-read of “The Prince’s Tale” in order to re-assess. I did start to get the feeling that there are things Rowling wrote about Snape that came, as Card said, from her subconscious – things she was investing into Snape that even she. I think I’ll take this up on a podcast.

But you are correct: the life of Snape outside the series itself, in Fandom, has been completely unbelievable, and in some places, baffling to me.

And I also think you’re correct that she thought people would loathe it because of the blatantly Christian content. You’re also correct that the climax is what will make the series a classic in the end. But I also think it’s possible she thought people would loathe it after stumbling across some of the insanely long “unanswered questions” lists posted on fan sites.

I agree with you Travis and others here. I loved Deathly Hallows. The symbolism she uses in this book is so profound and the Vancouver Sun quotation was fulfilled to the letter. We see Harry Potter reaching out to the outcasts (house elves and goblins) and smuggling muggles out from trials. We see him saving the life of Draco Malfoy. We see him taking the sword out of the water in the forest (Arthurian overtones) and going into the forest to his death. Voldemort serves as the embodiment of evil like a Hitler (taking over the Ministry and imposing regulations and registration and killing of muggles) as well as Lucifer (Dark Ascending reminds me of that verse in Isaiah 14 as well as Voldemort flying). Cross imagery? Like you said Travis, Mad-Eye’s grave, the Sword of Gryffindor that Harry thought was a silver cross, and yes King’s Cross. There is just so much Christian imagery being invoked here.

I found it interesting that after Harry Potter visited his parents grave, he was going to suggest to Hermione to take refuge in the church nearby with the parishioners singing Christmas carols but Hermione interrupted his thoughts.

Also the siver doe is a female stag, a symbol of Christ. And did anyone notice the William Penn quotation? He was a Quaker Christian.

Harry has really transformed alchemically in his reaction to Dudley, Kreacher, Voldemort, Snape. He’s a changed man and he took on the Dark Lord and came out victorious.

I love this novel!!!!!!!!!!!

I forgot to mention that Deathly Hallows probably has more references to church and God than any previous HP novel. Also when Harry went to his death, he was accompanied by his dead parents and others, which reminded me of the dead that went into Jerusalem at Christ’s death and resurrection in Matthew 27. I think this scene and the resurrection scene after the “afterlife” convo with Dumbledrore was probably more profound than the Aslan crucible scene and I love Narnia.

The whole King’s Cross chapter was excellent.
In tone I was put in mind of the Tolkien story- Leaf by Niggle and inside the stable in The Last Battle.

I’d like to encourage everyone to read Leaf by Niggle especially if the King’s Cross chapter was special to them

Matthew

Shadowquill and Matthew (Korg)—

I thought it was odd that LV allowed so many teachers to stay on, but he did want wizarding children to be educated, and he probably didn’t have qualified replacements under his thumb (we’ve hardly seen academic brilliance among the DE’s except for Snape) so he needed McGonagall, Flitwick, Sprout, Slughorn, etc.. It also occurred to me that Snape might have convinced LV to allow Hagrid the half-giant to stay not because he was irreplaceable but because Hagrid is arguably the likeliest leaky bucket in the Order (even though I don’t think Snape used him that way, and as Shadowquill pointed out, Snape sent vulnerable students to Hagrid for detention, which protected them since Hagrid wasn’t in the castle where he would be closely watched).

**
Trish-

Thanks for your response, but Dumbledore was clearly going under from the effects of the green potion, and Dumbledore himself told Harry it was a poison, but one that wouldn’t kill him immediately.

One of the funniest things in the book was that the ministry workers had to get to work by being flushed down the dunny like turds.

The Ministry has become the sewer of the wizarding world and Thicknesse the biggest stool on the steaming heap.

Matthew

I just felt like clarifying my thoughts on the subject because lots of my friends thought it was an insufficient revelation about Snape.

Travis, thanks for the welcome, though I won’t be sticking around. Just a clarification (I think you often have a hard time understanding what I’ve said, but I don’t know why!) I did not say Lily hated Snape and Snape hated Lily! I said Snape hated *James*, who hated him. There is no evidence *in the text* that anyone ever loved Snape, and that includes Lily. He loved her; she did not love him.

And, though I’m sure everyone’s right that Rowling wanted to yank the focus of the books away from Snape back to Harry, for me, she did not succeed.

Of course, I don’t actually believe that Snape’s body was left to rot in the Shack. What I do believe is that it was cruel and disrespectful to the many Snape fans not to mention that he got a funeral. And why was he not in the afterlife scenes? All we would have liked was two or three sentences indicating he got some respect from someone other than Harry. Not tears, not liking – just some respect. Would that have been so hard, given all the fluff Rowling did give us?

There were some wonderful things in these books, even in this one – as I said before. Rowling can write characters her readers find lovable. She is gifted, and this book could have been a classic for the ages. It is not; she fell short because she was rushed and couldn’t be bothered to (1) show some mercy to a character she personally hated, and (2)present a consistent and cohesive morality in her fictional universe. A couple of people on hogpro brought up the Snape/Sidney Carton analogy. It doesn’t work for me, for a couple of reasons. First, Dickens allowed Carton a sacrificial death which actually saved someone else’s life. Rowling refuses to grant Snape that honor. Second, that death actually made the birth of the child named for Carton possible. Again, not so for Snape. I think the naming of the little boy (who, like young Severus, seems like a sweet kid) is meant to show us how good and forgiving *Harry* is. And yes, it was touching, but too little, too late, considering Rowling didn’t even bother to give Snape an afterlife.

mary, sorry I misunderstood you!

I think Lily loved Snape; just not in that way. Best friends love each other.

I do think it’s a stretch to say that the book failed to be a classic because she failed to show some mercy to Snape. (I also don’t think it’s fair to say she personally hated him). I think generations who did not take part in the long, 10 year development of Severus Snape will not be reacting the same way Big Time Snape Fans are reacting now. When they see that Harry named his son “Albus Severus,” they’ll know the incredibly value of Snape’s sacrifice. The death itself was not a direct, substitional sacrifice, no. But the entirety of his life’s suffering, including his death, was. Without Snape, Voldemort would have remained alive, and Harry woud not have succeeded.

I think there will be room for lots of discussion on whether or not Rowling’s morality was cohesive and consistent.

IMO, the “flayed baby” at the Harry/Dumbledore King’s Cross was William Penn and George Fox’s “that which is of God in every man” by way of Quaker theology. The Society of Friends view is that everyone (yah, Hitler, whomever) has a bit of God in them, and the question is whether we are faithful to that “divine spark” and let it burn so brightly in our actions that it shows forth as a Holy Flame, or we let it wither and dwindle. That’s in keeping with Rowling showing that even Voldemort still has a fragment of humanity, or the divine image within his humanity, that is in-between with Harry, and is the grounding for Harry’s remarkable choice to give even Tom Riddle (“you dare?” he says when called by his proper, human name) a final chance to tend the flayed scrap of what God has placed in him, and is waiting to receive home in whatever condition we have raised that imago dei to fulfill. Riddle rejects even that last gift (see the dwarves in “The Last Battle”), but the offer is made, i suspect in Harry’s mind to that sobbing infant-figure under the benches in King’s Cross.

Felicity:
Dumbledore wasn’t going under from just the potion. The curse in his hand was also working on him.
I didn’t say the potion wasn’t poison. It was, just not a deadly poison. It was also meant to weaken the victim to make him easier prey for the inferi.

Did anyone else think of Matthew 2 and Revelation 12 in Bathilda’s house? Christmas is being rung in and suddenly there is a flashback to Voldemort’s first coming to kill Harry at James and Lily’s house. Voldemort, like the dragon and Herod at the first Christmas, seeks to destroy the child who will bring an end to his kingdom. In the resulting attack he and his angels are cast down and loses his power. The child, however, is delivered and is destined to gain the rod that gives power over all others.

The good guys using the unforgivable curses didn’t bother me in the slightest. There were some people like Bellatrix that I would just love to cast the curse on. That woman really boiled my blood! Ever since she killed Sirius I have had a strong loathing of her. Way to go Molly! She really put Bella in her place! “NOT MY DAUGHTER YOU B**CH!” Ha ha!

Sometimes I was so enthralled in the book, that I just wanted to jump in the story and cast dozens of “Forgivable” curses. I call them forgivable when you use them in a war.

I hate Bellatrix, but in a way I sort of love her interesting character. I think they picked the perfect actor to play her in the movie. I love Helena Carter.

I am glad Draco lived, he was just pitiful with the way he was born into a Death Eater family. You can tell his parents really love him and I think they were so tied in with Voldemort that there best bet was to stick with him till the end and hope that he would lay mercy upon them until Harry defeated the Dark lord.

I have always liked Draco and Snape the whole time and every time a new book came out I said as long as the trio and my two favorite Slytheren make it, I’ll be happy. I always trusted Dumbledore’s faith in Snape. I just hate that Snape died. That is the only part I really hated about the book. The rest was great. Although there was way too much romance with Ginny for my taste, but I guess it was needed for the Potter family line to continue. I also noticed that things seemed to fall into place to easily but the purse that Hermione had was just hilarious to me! I can’t wait to see Emma Watson with her arm shoulder deep in there. I think it will look funny on the big screen and I think that J.K.R. was going for a little humor in such a war-stricken story.

In our own imagination though I am sure that we are all writing our own endings to the story and rearranging the parts we hated. That is what I like about reading, imagining what you wish had happened. Dumbledore said it better than anyone… Just because it is in your mind, doesn’t mean it isn’t real.

I’ve been working on writing my own story for over ten years now and I only hope I will be satisfied like J.K.R.

And didn’t you just love Peeves little Victory Song? Voldy’s gone Moldy! Didn’t I read a chat somewhere when J.K.R. said something about the fans calling Voldemort Voldy? Maybe that’s where she got the idea.

Anyway… at least my little cousins won’t have to be afraid of saying Voldemort anymore! They even got me saying Who-Know-Who out of habit!

Let it be known that the world can now say Voldemort without looking around nervously! And yes, I am a bit nutty, or “mental” as Ron would say!

What was snape talking about when he said “always” to dumbledore. always what…

Thanks dave

Fellow Dave,

I agree with you that the revelation of Snapes true character was sudden short lived, to say the least. But when you think about the overall events that were taking place throughout Hallows, how else could it have happened?

Rowling hints that Snape’s character is ultimately good midway through the book durring the scene where Harry finds out that Ginny and Neville were trying to disrupt the school and steal back the sword of gryffindor. In this scene we see that Snape’s punishment to Ginny and them, obvious supporters of Harry and his cause, is to simply go into the Forbidden Forest with Hagrid, something we have seen that really isnt all to dificult and for them might seem fun, as shown in the first few books. When I first read that the first conclusion that I came to was that Snape must be ultimately good. Otherwise he would have made the punishment absolutely brutal leaning more towards the cruelty of the Callows.

So here we see that Rowling is showing the true nature of Snape, but it is also his vital role that he stay neer Voldemort to follow his every action. With this being the case Snape never had a chance to see Harry and pass on the vital information that was given to him by Dumbledore. This is why we see Snape begging Lord Voldemort to let him find Harry durring the battle.

On a side note, but reffering to your comment, the hour break Voldemort gives the Order, in my opinion, is an absolutely brilliant move because it is a direct message to Harry. In that moment he basically gave Harry an ultimatum, come and face me or I will kill everyone that you love. The castle was surrounded and there is no way reinforcements were going to be comming any time in the near future. Anyone who was going to be able to fight was inside that castle, and Voldemort knew that with one final surge he would win. But like he says to Neville after supposedly killing Harry, it is a waste of magical talent and pure blood. So he gives Harry the opportunity to stop letting his friends die, and come to him, which is beneficial on 2 levels. 1: Harry will come alone, meaning its a battle of magical skill where Voldemort is the clear winner, 2: Harry does not get a chance to hide or runaway, or think of some other way to defeat voldemort, in Harrys mind, at this point it is now or never.

But back to Snape, with all these circumstances in place there is no opportunity for Snape to meet with Harry, convince him he is good, tell him what has to happen, and still make Voldemort think he is a loyal death eater. With Harry as the most wanted man in the wizarding world it physically want possible for this revelation to come in any other way then through the Pensive, and as the Order begins to fade in the battle of hogwarts it was clear, at least to me, that something drastic had to happen, and quick, for harry to learn what Snape knew.

Jo’s scene filled this slot nicely and clearly tied up “most” ends that came with that part of the story line. Yes, it was a very sudden and drastic change in the emotional state of Harry, but war has a tendency to have these effects in the real world. Add magic to that and there was no telling what scenario could have happened. Either way I think she did a great job on the novel, especialy towards the end of the book, and I couldnt see her having written it any other way, though I am greatly awaiting the encyclopedia to satisfy my interest in some of the back stories.

Ed, yeah…I scratched my head over that one, too. I passed it off as a simple plot goof, though.

My best rationalization of it (and I hope that this doesn’t come back to me through the fora as an answer to my own question) is that it wasn’t the true sword at all, though it is clearly identified in the closing chapters as sitting beside Neville.

There was mention of uncertainty from Dumbledore surrounding the unknown ramifications of having a “living” horcrux, i.e. the snake. Perhaps no “darkly” enchanted weapon was necessary to destroy a living horcrux (The “replica” need only have been simply a “random sword”). To lend some credence to the theory, Voldemort would have little need of a protection spell on his pet if the contrary were true.

Have you heard any comment on the note?

And it makes sense that Neville could do that. After Harry used the sword to kill the Basilisk, Dumbledore told him that “only a true Gryffindor could have pulled that out of the hat.” In Book 7, Neville has become a “true Gryffindor,” showing courage by leading the DA and resisting the new regime at Hogwarts, as well as receiving a direct charge from Harry to kill the snake. The Sorting Hat responds by conjuring the sword for Neville exactly when he needs it.

I’m a moron…just reread it. hmmmf. …must have missed that bit.

Great Book! to all you nay-sayers.

Self-Flattery:

TOTALLY knew…Dumbledore’s plea to Snape in Book 6 was to spare Draco’s innocence and thus Snape was compelled to kill Dumbledore…maybe not a “good-guy”, but certainly in keeping with his persona in the books. We can’t have TOO many reversals can we?

there are a couple of things that i may have passed over in my excitement of the book, yet i am still confused about.

1. i thought the goblin took the sword in the bank. how did longbottom have it at the end of the book to kill nagini? i thought that ron and hermonie grabbed the basilisk fangs because they had no sword?

2. how did the elder wand choose draco? it was snape that killed dumbeldore so wouldnt the wand be his?

maybe i just overlooked a few things, but i would much appreciate it being cleared up by anyone who has some insight for me!

thanks, kate

Kate…

As you can see, I had the same confusion…

I went back and read…the sword, in fact, appeared out of the sorting hat (Chamber), the one random thing that Voldemort decided to summon out of the castle during his bad guy monologue…hmmf.

Draco had “bested” Dumbledore (i.e. “won” the wand), who was distracted, petrifying Harry for his protection in the tower (Book 6). Harry bested Draco at the Malfoy’s.

Until the final confrontation with Voldemort, none of the “good guys” but Harry, Ron & Hermione knew Snape was dead, where his body was, and only Harry knew Snape had really been on their side (he was alone with Snape’s memories in the Pensieve)

Yes, and after Dumbledore’s death nobody but Snape knew what side Snape really was on. That must have been a tremendous burden.

I really liked how Harry felt safe when the Patronus was around and how it assured the three of them that somebody was on their side.

It was also comforting that Snape looked into Harry’s/ Lily’s eyes in the final moment of his life. I think if he could have made one last wish, this would have been it. It was almost like Harry walking to his death with his loved ones. He wasn’t alone. I found that so much more emotionally satisfying than a description of an honourable funeral.

With few words Rowling pretty much said it all, it was perfectly done.

Hi you folks, I am a christian, but I think all these references to Jesus are a bit exaggerated. This is a fiction novel, not the bible.

Fantastic book and wonderful, thought provoking comments! Thank you all and special thanks to you Travis, for creating the “Sword of Gryffindor.”

Right from the start, Rowling has acknowledged the pain of her mother’s death and how it influenced her writing. Through all the HP books, mothers or surrogates have figured prominently and while I don’t believe Rowling’s overarching theme is the importance of motherly love, she regularly revisits the power or the mother/child relationship. I’m even willing to suggest that Rowling’s characters are shaped for better or worse by the relationship they had with their mother.

On the good relationship side there’s Lilly Potter, Molly Weasley, Professor McGonagall, Kendra Dumbledore even Narcissa Malfoy. All of these mothers and surrogate mothers are strong women, willing to sacrifice themselves for their child. Lilly is obvious and Molly battled Bellatrix to save Ginny. As surrogates to Harry, both Molly and Professor McGonagall repeatedly supported, defended and protected him, as well as fought on his behalf. Even as a Death Eater, Narcissa Malfoy is consumed with worry for Draco, attempting to manipulate people and situations on his behalf and also willing to sacrifice herself for her son. It might even be argued that her love for Draco helps Harry defeat Voldemort. Finally, Kendra Dumbledore’s care, protection and ultimate sacrifice for Ariana helped shape Dumbledore’s character.

On the other hand, both Snape and Tom Riddle had weak, down trodden mothers; Snape growing up in an unhappy home and Tom in an orphanage.

Finally – and this one is a stretch – Rowling starts “The Deathly Hallows” by including several lines from the Greek play, “The Libation Bearer.” In this Greek tragedy, Orestes, son of Agamemnon, returns home to avenge his father’s death at the hands of his mother and her lover. Orestes commits matricide and ultimately goes mad. While the play addresses the bigger issue of revenge, it’s interesting that Rowling chose a play with a self-absorbed mother. (As I said – a stretch.)

Any thoughts?

Daryl, true, Snape did it all because he loved Lily. But his love wasn’t selfish, otherwise he wouldn’t have done good for her sake. So it wasn’t just about him but about the person he loved. I believe, what people do matters, even if it’s not for the most noble and altruistic reasons. And I wouldn’t call a person evil who has done good for so many years.

In my opinion, nobody who is “most evil” would have done what he did and not even many of the “good” ones. Of course, he wasn’t as selfless as Harry, but Harry was exceptional. He was better than Snape, even better than Dumbledore, certainly better than myself. He was really special.

So we can at least agree that he did good things, even heroic things.

And someone who does good things, and even heroic things is a – ?

Doug (post #37)

You said: “All that may be true, but the charge against Albus, both as a teenager and as an adult, was not that he was a bad person. It was that he was tempted by power, and was far too willing to use others to further “the greater good”.

“Harry would have consented, had he known the truth – he really was willing to die to defeat Voldemort. But Albus never bothered to tell him the truth in any of their heart-to-heart chats. Instead that was left as yet one more unpleasant task on Snape’s plate, to be done only at the last possible moment.”

I think the reason Dubledore didn’t tell Harry can be paralleled in Scripture. On the Cross, there is a moment when Christ is in despair and cries out “My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me.” (or left me in my time of need. I believe God withdrew his spirit and support of Christ in this very trying time so that Christ could make a conscious decision to fulfill his mission to the bitter end. He CHOSE to give up the ghost. I think Harry had to do the same thing. He needed to CHOOSE to sacrifice himself to Lord Thingy without the hope of coming back. This makes his sacrifice complete. It is this willingness to die for others with no thought for himself that seals the protection on the rest of the wizarding world.

Never underestimate the power of the internet. An increasing number of people use the internet
to search for a business or service so having a web presence is an important media for promoting
your company. Web design is a real skill and if your website is to not only look good but work well,
it should be constructed by a professional web designer.

If you are interested, you can contact me: hqwebdesign (AT) gmail (DOT) com

Hello eveyone, I’m new to the forum
I look forward to sharing and exchanging information with everyone!
I have been watching the forum for a while and I just decided to join and participate!
See ya…

Hi,

What is the cheapest web hosting company?

I’m want to set up a web site for my new business.

Thank you,

-Wendy